First Impressions of St. Louis

[True Blue]

I think you "pessimists" seem to forget that if St. Louis wants to keep playing after his current contract is up, he'll likely resign here. Why wouldn't he?

Based on what? And what is he going to do beyond his 39 years?

 

[True Blue]

I disagree. IF we are using winning a cup as a barometer of success how could THAT barometer not extend to the former captain? Wouldn't your logic make EVERY draft pick for the last 20 years a failure? If you are upset the Rangers gave up picks (which I agree could come back to haunt them) isn't the counter argument the Rangers aren't doing enough with draft picks to be worried about trading them?

It is possible that you are misrepresenting what I said on purpose. But I am going to presume differently.

NOT winning the Stanly Cup is not necessarily a barometer of whether or not a team has had a successful year. However, in the case of THIS trade, it IS a barometer because of what was given away for an aged star.

It would not have cost the Rangers draft picks to keep Callahan and not win the Cup. It will cost the Rangers draft picks if a 38 or 39 year old player does not bring the Cup home.

 

[zuckera1]

Based on what? And what is he going to do beyond his 39 years?

He demanded a trade here and wants to stay close to his family, so if he wants to keep playing past the age of 40, why would he leave?

 

[Pizza]

Yeah, before the trade there were a few guys on NHL Network Radio advocating this.

Sather may have gotten killed for it, especially from those of us who wanted to parlay Callahan into younger assets, but in retrospect it's turning out to be a potentially much better move than the trade Sather wound up making.

I was among those who was unhappy with Callahan's effort this year compared to prior years (and this year's Olympics), as it looked like he was just trying not to get hurt. I don't think anyone in Tampa Bay is unhappy with him, however.

There ya go.

It's a difficult situation. No question. I'm not making any excuses for Sather. He's made some moves that were great, others that were terrible.

I'm not surprised with how this one has worked out so far. The expectations on St. Louis are HUGE. Let's not kid ourselves here. Everyone sees acquiring MSL as a total win now situation. He replaced a fan fave in New York. The Captain. He's feeling the pressure. Maybe for the first time in a long time and it shows. He's gotta really perform at his peak and help take the Rangers to a cup....or his whole career ends on a very sour note.

No pressure monsieur. Anyone thinks this is easy for him or the room is being delusional.

For Callahan the pressure is all off now. He's free of New York. Gets to play a support role as a highly respected veteran on a smaller market team with a much higher profile star. If the Bolt's fail, it ain't on Cally. This summer he gets to sign with the highest bidder or make the deal most appealing to him and his family.

Nice work if you can get it. I think he made a very smart play because I'm becoming more convinced he did not want to stay.

 

[True Blue]

He demanded a trade here and wants to stay close to his family, so if he wants to keep playing past the age of 40, why would he leave?

So there is nothing tangible to say that he will probably want to resign here? Just hopes and dreams?

And let's even go with that rosy scenario. What do most 40 year olds give you? How many superstar 40 year olds have there been in the entire history of the NHL? MSL is a depreciating asset. With any luck, the depreciation suddenly does not become an accelerated one.

 

[Jersey Girl]

He demanded a trade here and wants to stay close to his family, so if he wants to keep playing past the age of 40, why would he leave?

We only traded for the rights to St Louis through next season. Beyond that, we could have signed him as a free agent for nothing - except money of course.

 

[free0717]

Gave up way too much to get Marty. It was for 20 games and 1 season. Sather got hosed. Sather had all the leverage as Marty would only go to the Rangers.

 

[Thirty One]

So there is nothing tangible to say that he will probably want to resign here? Just hopes and dreams?

rudum.

And let's even go with that rosy scenario. What do most 40 year olds give you? How many superstar 40 year olds have there been in the entire history of the NHL? MSL is a depreciating asset. With any luck, the depreciation suddenly does not become an accelerated one.

How many superstar 38 year olds have there been? How many of them depreciated significantly from 38-40?

 

[Jersey Girl]

How many superstar 38 year olds have there been? How many of them depreciated significantly from 38-40?

Martin Brodeur says hello

 

[zuckera1]

So there is nothing tangible to say that he will probably want to resign here? Just hopes and dreams?

And let's even go with that rosy scenario. What do most 40 year olds give you? How many superstar 40 year olds have there been in the entire history of the NHL? MSL is a depreciating asset. With any luck, the depreciation suddenly does not become an accelerated one.

And there's nothing tangible to say he's a depreciating asset, unless of course you put all of your faith in a 12-game sample size.

MSL is the exception, not the rule. I believe he can be a productive player into his 40s if he wants to be. I'm confident he could give us 50-60 points at age 40/41.

 

[Son of Steinbrenner]

It is possible that you are misrepresenting what I said on purpose. But I am going to presume differently.

NOT winning the Stanly Cup is not necessarily a barometer of whether or not a team has had a successful year. However, in the case of THIS trade, it IS a barometer because of what was given away for an aged star.

It would not have cost the Rangers draft picks to keep Callahan and not win the Cup. It will cost the Rangers draft picks if a 38 or 39 year old player does not bring the Cup home.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to accuse me of deliberately misrepresenting your position and then say you are assuming I'm not doing that. Thank you for that bit of consideration and the passive aggressive reply.

I don't totally disagree with your position as the day before the trade i posted perhaps the best thing to do is nothing. I have conceded numerous times that this deal could turn out to be a disaster. I've also asked you direct questions that you choose to ignore because they kill your argument. I get it, I understand that you can't budge at this point. Its unfair to pick this one deal and say its a failure if the rangers dont win a cup as I've explained to you numerous times. It doesn't help either of us to look at this one deal in a vacuum. Its flat out not fair to the players on the roster. The rangers were in a position both in the standings and in the upward swing of the franchise as a whole to make this deal......if you disagree you disagree but that doesn't make you right.

No offense but its ridiculous to extend your win a cup or its a failure position to this one deal. Either thats your position on everything or its hypocrisy.

 

[Thirty One]

Martin Brodeur says hello

K.

Ray Whitney, Teemu Selanne, Jaromir Jagr.

 

[Jersey Girl]

K.

Ray Whitney, Teemu Selanne, Jaromir Jagr.

Not good examples at all. Selanne and Jagr went down significantly in their late 30's and Whitney was never elite.

Good effort, though, got me thinking.

 

[Thirty One]

Not good examples at all. Selanne and Jagr went down significantly in their late 30's and Whitney was never elite.

Good effort, though, got me thinking.

Selanne:
38: .831 Pts/GP
39: .889 Pts/GP
40: 1.095 Pts/GP

Jagr wasn't in the NHL in his late 30s, so I'm not sure what you're basing that on.

But anyways the point is it's not fair to say there's very few stars at 40 as justification as to why St. Louis will decline rapidly, because there's very few stars at 38.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Selanne:
38: .831 Pts/GP
39: .889 Pts/GP
40: 1.095 Pts/GP

LOL nice spin, trying to use points per game, to hide the fact that Teemu missed games - I like that! Here is another way to calculate Teemu from age 38-40. He averaged 60 points per game during those years - hardly elite!

AND missing games is one of he negatives as you age, so your points per game stats are irrelevant. What matters is what he actually produced.

Jagr wasn't in the NHL in his late 30s, so I'm not sure what you're basing that on.

Actually Jaromir WAS in the NHL at age 39, where he scored 54 points in 73 games for the Flyers. You musta missed that. Again, hardly elite.

And I already mentioned Brodeur. Again...

 

[Thirty One]

LOL nice spin using points per game, to hide the fact that Teemu missed games - I like that! Here is another way to calculate Teemu from age 38-40. He averaged 60 points per game during those years - hardly elite!

AND missing games is one of he negatives as you age, so your points per game stats are irrelevant. what matters is what he actually produced.

Selanne:
38: 65 GP
39: 54 GP
40: 73 GP

and then 82 GP at age 41.

But, again, this is far beyond the point.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Selanne:
38: 65 GP
39: 54 GP
40: 73 GP

And he averaged 60 points during those years. Not elite.

and then 82 GP at age 41.

When he scored 66 points. Not elite.

 

[Cassano]

I know when your GM's mantra is nothing more than "Win now" and the franchise is in a perpetual state of trying to win it all every year by making lazy signings/trades and praying that Henrik will have a historical playoff run, it's somewhat taboo to plan for the future.

I mean, Sather has had such a fruitful and disaster-free tenure as GM for the last 13~ years, I can't really blame anyone for adopting his mentality.

I think it's a consensus that Sather is a moron.

I just don't see how going for MSL in 18 months and trading for MSL at the trade deadline is interchangeable. Getting 2 playoff runs from an elite winger is part of the reason why the trade was done now. Actually, it's THE reason.

 

[Emptyvoid]

And he averaged 60 points during those years. Not elite.



When he scored 66 points. Not elite.

So when crosby had his injured years, he didn't produce at an elite level?

 

[TheTakedown]

Martin Brodeur says hello

Jagr is with him, he waves as well

 

[StepansLabyrinth]

And he averaged 60 points during those years. Not elite.

That's almost PPG. What do you consider "elite" production?

 

[Thirty One]

That's almost PPG. What do you consider "elite" production?

61 points or more.

 

[Synergy27]

Bottom line, dude needs to play better. Very hard for him to play well enough to justify that trade, but damn dude, relax and score some goals.

 

[StepansLabyrinth]

I think some of you are really overstating how valuable a late 1st round pick is. I'm all for protecting picks but the chances of a late 1st turning into a star is very small. Here are the results of picks made in 20-30, by draft between 2006-2008.

2006: 1 star (Giroux). 1 very good goalie (Varlamov). 2 regular NHLers in Foligno and Berglund. 6 guys who didn't/haven't panned out (Sanguenetti, Irving, Persson, Summers, Fischer, Vishnevskiy).

2007: 1 really good forward (Pacioretty). 1 good forward (Perron). 5 with around 100 NHL games or less (Jim O'Brien, Riley Nash, Michael Backund, Brendan Smith, Jon Blum). 3 busts (Patrick White, Nick Ross, Nick Petrecki)

2008: 2 very good players (Eberle, Carlson). 3 regular NHLers (Michael Del Zotto, Mattias Tedenby, Tyler Ennis). 6 busts (Tikhonov, Nemisz, Cuma, McCollum, Gustaffson, Leveille)

Totals: 5 good players/stars. 10 regular NHLers. 15 busts.

We traded away a player that's 50% likely to bust, 33% likely to be a decent player, and 17% likely to be a good/great player.

Would this be a bad deal if we traded away Nick Petrecki? Tikhonov?

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

I think some of you are really overstating how valuable a late 1st round pick is. I'm all for protecting picks but the chances of a late 1st turning into a star is very small. Here are the results of picks made in 20-30, by draft between 2006-2008.

2006: 1 star (Giroux). 1 very good goalie (Varlamov). 2 regular NHLers in Foligno and Berglund. 6 guys who didn't/haven't panned out (Sanguenetti, Irving, Persson, Summers, Fischer, Vishnevskiy).

2007: 1 really good forward (Pacioretty). 1 good forward (Perron). 5 with around 100 NHL games or less (Jim O'Brien, Riley Nash, Michael Backund, Brendan Smith, Jon Blum). 3 busts (Patrick White, Nick Ross, Nick Petrecki)

2008: 2 very good players (Eberle, Carlson). 3 regular NHLers (Michael Del Zotto, Mattias Tedenby, Tyler Ennis). 6 busts (Tikhonov, Nemisz, Cuma, McCollum, Gustaffson, Leveille)

Totals: 5 good players/stars. 10 regular NHLers. 15 busts.

We traded away a player that's 50% likely to bust, 33% likely to be a decent player, and 17% likely to be a good/great player.

Would this be a bad deal if we traded away Nick Petrecki? Tikhonov?

Knowing our luck, we traded away a future great player.